Many types of sports equipment are useable only under certain conditions and/or in specific locales. Examples of such sports equipment include surfboards that are ridden at beaches and snow skis that are normally used at ski resorts. The beach and ski areas are often remotely located from the homes of those who use them, Therefore, the need for transporting sports equipment upon vehicles to these locations has long been recognized.
In the instance of bicycling, a rider will often desire to ride his or her bicycle in different areas without having to ride the bicycle to those areas. To facilitate the transportation of one or more bicycles, bicycle carriers mountable to passenger vehicles have been developed. A popular category of carriers are those that are mountable to the rear end of a vehicle, however, it should be appreciated that most basic carrier designs can be adapted to be mounted at other locations upon a vehicle as long as the location is convenient for loading the bicycles onto the carriers and neither the bicycles nor the carrier inconveniences the driver or obstructs visibility.
A sports equipment carrier may not always be utilized on the same carrying vehicle or for carrying the same pieces of sports equipment such as bicycles. In fact, body configurations vary widely among different passenger vehicles, as do bicycle size and configuration. If the configuration of the carrier were fixed, the utilization of such a carrier would be significantly restricted.
Another aspect of such load carriers often suffering from deficient design is the cradle upon which the bicycles rest, and by which the bicycles are secured to the carrier. Typically, these cradles provide an important buffer between the carrier and the bicycle, as well as a means for securement. Different configurations for such cradles often include a securing band or strap that wraps around the supported bicycle frame member.
In a load carrier arrangement typified by that illustrated in FIG. 1, there are load bearing cradles positioned on the arms utilizing a through-hole provided therein; such cradles normally being more or less constructed out of at least semi-hard plastic or resin. At the time of manufacture of such cradles, the through-hole is provided with an interior diameter that is less than the expected exterior diameter of the carrying arm. Therefore, a tight fit will be established between the combination of the two pieces (cradle and arm), and in this way the cradle is located at an effectively fixed position on the arm during both periods of use and nonuse. Still further, the fit is sufficiently tight so that when a bicycle is placed on the cradle, the combined assemblage (bicycle on the cradle) is prevented from moving with respect to the arm during normal operating maneuvers of the carrying vehicle.
In contrast, an operator typically also wants to be able to move the cradle on the arm so that it can be variably positioned thereupon. This gives rise to two competing goals; one which desires to fix the cradle on the arm and another to enable user induced, relative movement of the cradle for permitting the establishment of different carrying positions of the cradle on the arm.
Because of the cradle's typical construction from predominantly hard plastic, a problem arises and is rooted in the well appreciated (by those persons skilled in the technicalities of material science) phenomenon of cold-flow “creep” or “compressive set”. The practical effect resulting from cold-flow creep in the present instance is that the “stretched” configuration of the cradle is eventually assumed by the base causing there to no longer be a tight fit between the cradle and arm. The detriment to the user is that the cradle now has either little or no resistance to movement on the arm, which translates into an inability to hold-fast an article positioned in the cradle relative to the balance of the incorporating carrier. These detrimental effects can include accentuated swinging or translational movement of the carried articles which can scratch the transporting vehicle, or worse, if not prevented by an interference component such as an end cap, the cradle, including whatever it is carrying (bicycle) may slide free of the arm and be lost from the vehicle.
At least one solution which has been employed and which is not susceptible to creep is the utilization of a screw or similar device that causes an interference connection between a cradle and arm. This, however, is an inadequate solution in that it not only fixes longitudinal movement of the cradle along the length of the arm (but which is sometimes desired), but rotational movement of the cradle on the arm is also prevented, and which is often similarly desired by the user. Essentially preventing these two adjustment aspects substantially compromises the utility of such carriers to consumers.
As may be appreciated from the discussion hereinabove, once a cradle is installed upon the arm of a load carrier, it may very likely be desirable that the cradle not have to be removed from the arm in order to reconfigure the carrier, or accessorize the cradle arrangement. One particular instance is the incorporation of anti-sway devices with such cradle arrangements that are used to stabilized carried cargo during transport. Known devices for these purposes typically require that the cradle be removed from the arm, and the anti-sway device and cradle be reinstalled together in their combination by sliding the anti-sway device and cradle back onto the arm in a direction that is substantially parallel to the longitudinal axis of the arm. This drawback is one which the presently disclosed anti-sway invention remedies.
In view of these observations, a need obviously exists for improved designs of anti-sway devices that can be installed in conjunction with a bicycle cradle without requiring that that cradle be removed from the arm in the process. A similar need is associated with removal such anti-sway devices.